Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Sayro Bano — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Sayro Bano — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No enforcement relief to the applicants: the respective arbitral awards stand set aside owing to the unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator; the Commercial Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons, if any, stand dismissed / disposed. Parties are left free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of this judgment excluded for limitation, and liberty to apply where an express written waiver under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 exists.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards rendered under a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can stand/be enforced through the pending Commercial Execution Applications, given the Hon'ble Supreme Court's observation that unilateral appointment is void ab initio. +2 more

Court's answer

In view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India), the respective arbitral awards stand set aside, the appointment of the sole arbitrator in all these matters having been found unilateral.

Ratio / Principle

Accordingly, the Commercial Execution Applications and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, stand dismissed / disposed.

Key takeaways

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶19
As far as limitation is concerned, in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today (the date of this judgment) is to be excluded.ratio¶20
Liberty to apply is reserved where there exists an express agreement in writing, in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the said Act.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (OOCJ), Abhay Ahuja J., 21 April 2026 — Batch of Commercial Execution Applications, Serial Nos. 901 to 1151. Acting on the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India (2026 SCC Online SC 7) that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage, and on the finding by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master that the sole arbitrator in all these matters had been unilaterally appointed, the court set aside the respective arbitral awards and dismissed / disposed of the Commercial Execution Applications and the connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons. Parties were declared free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the judgment excluded for limitation purposes; liberty to apply was reserved where an express agreement in writing exists in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waiving the arbitrator-ineligibility objection.

901 to 1151.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 1151

Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b S. G. Lega & Associates for the Applicant in Sr. No. 907, 914 and 1033 to 1038.

Mr. Raj Ambetkar i/bMs. Swantantri Waghmare for the Applicant in Sr. No. 1018.

None present in other matters.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 21^st April 2026

PC:-

All these matters have been listed in view of the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhadra International (India) Pvt.

Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India¹ where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution.

Since in all these matters it has been found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral, the said applications, in view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside and the Commercial Execution Applications and

NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL

Digitally signed by NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL Date: 2026.04.21 17:33:11 +0530

the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, stand accordingly dismissed / disposed.

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

901 to 1151.doc

It would be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.

As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

Liberty to apply in the event there exists an express agreement in writing in terms of proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the “said Act”) waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the said Act.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

Nikita Gadgil 2/2